The Day Of All Days

REVERSAL OF ROLES

This article is just another reiteration of recycled facts. It does not give any new insight. The only difference in this article I have found is the role reversal of the author. Not too long ago Ferozk used to write articles about the same regime in the tone that suggested that he is about to commit suicide in depression. That was the time when Musharaf was a man of honor. He was nabbing the culprits who stole from the Paksitani nation and returned the money to its rightful owners. At that time he saved the nation from the scourge and tyrrany of BB and NS. That was the time when Musharaf, put Hindus in the place where they belong. And not only that he had the courage to stand up to the so called champions of democracy. And that was the time when he was leading the nation through thick and thin and nation knew that sooner or later it would make it. And that was something that was driving the likes of Ferozk to suicide.

And now when same Musharaf has sold his soul to the devil; turned the country into a colonial outpost; Pak Army is once again shooting Paksitani men and women in the name of `hunt for whatever`; our soveriegnity has been lost; and the global colonial powers have turned Mushsraf into another despot and they pat his back and they have guts to tell us that `this is the democarcy`; constitution has been raped; people like Ferozk are showing us the avenues of hope in this new ``system``. They have found guts to use such phrases as ``constitutional reforms`` to descibe the rape of constitution and institutionalization of colonial subjugation.

This is quite a role reversal.

Re: Romair

I think that you have stated the dilemma of the Pakistani society well, but the point still is, where does that ignorance stems from and how can it be corrected? The National Security Council? Is that the answer to the problem?

Re: Faruk # 21

Democracy cannot be implemented by the army in Pakistan. It has been tried in the past and was discovered to be problematic.

In a utopian sense, the best thing would be to allow anarchy in Pakistan and let the process evolve a self-correcting mechanism for itself. Realistically, that cannot be attempted, so the alternative is to tailor a safe approach to democracy, with the army mid-wifing the process.

The problem is how do we, as a nation, learn to distrust the good judgement of the politicans with their past mistakes creating a strong historic memory? Do we forgive them their transgressions and hope for the best? The same applies to the army`s past historic record also.

The best compromise, and I am not sure, whether this is a bargain with the devil or not, would be to have a Turkish style military-civilian infrastructure ruling the country.

If you are assuming democracy in Pakistan to resemble a western style democratic setup, you are whistling a wrong tune! Pakistan has to evolve its own version of democracy, which in the final analysis is good for Pakistanis. That is all that matters and if Musharraf can do this, the final verdict on him will be positive.

Pakistan has never been a democracy, because neither the politicans or the armed forces have allowed democracy to flourish in Pakistan; they are both to be blamed for the lack of democracy in Pakistan!

Ciao

``Huzoor kya baat likhi hay, wallah [..the need of the hour - is the reform of the Pakistan Military by the civilian politicians - not the reform of the civilian politicians by the Army…] ...janab the civilian politicians that your are pining for are no good either…they have blackened their faces from the same pot````

My dear temporal saheb -- if not the politicians -- then who and what -- why we say these things about the politicians -- why are we redefining the politcians -- they are same everywhere -- they are corrupt everywhere -- only difference is of the degrees -- at the same they are indispensable everywhere -- show me one politician who is a mother teresa and I will show the evidence that Atilla the Hun was a Nun

if not NS and BB -- then who -- Imran and Shujaat? -- you have to use what you got -- for better or worse Pakistan has a two party system (a pretty stable political system if not killed by coup detaitis) and NS and BB are -- like it or not -- the ones who represent the majority.

these sinners minus their ill-gotten wealth -- are still hundred times better than an `extremely democratic` divinely-sent gunslinger who stole a government at gunpoint -- who NOW `promises` to return the stolen good as a pot of gold -- as a true sustainable democracy – and this he is doing by making a one-man ‘bhujia’ of Pakistan Constitution -- through his amendment factory shredder.

Now tell mere huzoor temporal saheb -- in the long distinguished history of thievery, robbery or burglary -- WHEN a burglar, or a thief or a robber -- has stolen a copper pot and returned it as a pot of gold?

Khair sirf aap kee khatir yeh turmeem -- ``the need of the hour - is the reform of the Pakistan Military by the civilians - - not the reform of the civilians by the Army``:-)

nasah #15
``the urgency -- the need of the hour -- is the reform of the Pakistan Military by the civilian politicians``

Yes, and the question that people who think that way had better be pondering with equal urgency is, how?

In my opinion, no one (I repeat no one), in any country, can stand up against an honest leader who has the common folk behind him. The military cannot stand up to him. Neither can the press. Nor the beaurecracy. Nor the feudals. Pakistan will not have democracy, until such a leader makes it to the top. The coming elections are now a good opportunity for the Pakistani voter to elect such people.

Unfortunately, I think we may see the same cycle of events re-occur. PML or PPP will win the elections, since they are the only two true feudal parties in Pakistan. Within these parties, generally the exact same people will win again.

It is incorrect to state that Pakistanis have not had a chance to elect their representatives. In the past twelve years, this will be the fifth election. Pakistanis have thus had more of a chance to change the leadership than probably 90% of the countries in the world. No one holds a gun to their heads (at least not in the urban areas), and forces them to vote for the PPP and PML, again and again. They do it thru their own free will. There are even some idiots in this elections calling for BB and NS to come and rule over us again. Am I the only one who thought these two bafoons robbed Pakistan dry? What can one say about a country where educated people want the same robbers to return? Such people must have a vested interest with the BBs and NSs of the world. I think the biggest threat to democracy in Pakistan are the people who want BB and NS to return.

If the BB brigade or the NS brigade comes into power again, then who should one blame? The Army, the beauracracy, India, the ``establishment,`` Jews...Shouldn`t the blame be put on the voter (at least the powerful urban voter, if not on the enslaved feudal voter?)

We need to get out of this tendency of blaming everything on America and India and the, ``establishment.`` There will be elections on Oct. 10. With the number of international observors in Pakistan, they are bound to be fair, or at least fair enough. It is true that the military govt. has assisted in forming a PML(QA) faction. Big deal. It cannot force people to vote for it. And the PML(QA) politicians themselves did not have to join this new party. They could have refused. There are 67 other registered political parties participating in this election. The voters are free to vote for any party they want (I am voting for Tehrik, because I don`t want PPP and PML(of any flavor) back). If the voters chose to vote in, themselves, the exact same people whom the voters themselves blame for the terrible 90s, then shouldn`t the voters finally start blaming themselves for the problems of Pakistan.

In my opinion, anyone who votes for the exact same PPP and the PML leaders loses the right to then complain about all the problems that the PPP and PML have caused to Pakistan, over the past decades. Such an individual should then only blame himself/herself when Zardari is appointed the Minister of Investment and sets up his off-shore companies again, and the Sharifs start locking up anyone who says anything against them, and start passing their Shariah Bill.

The other option is, of course, to criticize everyone. I wouldn`t be surprised if the same people who are singing the tunes of BB and NS and PPP and PML right now, become their biggest critics when these parties start screwing the country again. After all, these were the same people who criticized the PPP and PML in the 90s. Being a habitual critic is the easiest job in the world. It would be better however, if such folks picked an alternative option from what has ruled over Pakistan (i.e. someone other than PPP, PML and Army).

Pakistani political parties - The lack of conceptual Frame work

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_11-9-2002_pg1_9
``Election Watch: Manifestos leave key issues untouched
By Rana Qaisar
ISLAMABAD: While political parties have started announcing their election manifestos, none of them has so far come up with an agenda for economic and social changes in the country. With just 28 days to go before the elections, the political parties seem to be busy only in the selection of suitable candidates, to finalise their lists for the national and provincial assemblies or working out seat-to-seat adjustments with other parties.

Given the determination of President Pervez Musharraf to not let anyone reverse the reforms introduced during his three-year government and the many ‘ifs and buts’ punctuating the future political set-up, political parties find themselves in an uncertain situation after the elections, in which they may or may not be allowed to implement their own vision of Pakistan.``

Mr Qaisar - before political parties can implement their vision of Pakistan, shouldn`t they actually have such a vision? And isn`t it this vision of Pakistan that they seek the support of voters?? Chicken or egg? both, we are Pakistanis!

hobbes: Any comments under SameerJB name are mine and do not ascribe to the people of Pakistan. I do have the right to give my opinion about silly statements like, ``civilians lack understanding of military mind and vice versa``. I just presented my take that military should behave like good employees and stay on the turf assigned to them - garrison. They are like chowkidars found standing by the Banks and other buildings. Even if the bank has bad management, if long lines waiting for services or what not, chowkidar is not authorised to start running the bank on his own, just because he thinks he can manage it better.
Musharraf is illegitimate and it must be clear before discussing any step taken under his rule. This is also my opinion.
hobbes, if proper democratic procedures of the institutions were not being followed and politicians were much less than model public servants, military or chowkidars so not have the right to dismiss them at gunpoint, people do at polling stations will ballot papers.
Actually Musharraf himself has given the right answer couple of days ago at Harvard University. He said in response to a question that he took over to avoid humiliation. An employee taking over to avoid humiliation of being fired by the employer is what exactly it boils down to. Since then he has been trying to prolong his stay in power. Why is it so difficult for many intelligent interlocutors to undderstand?
Since his name can not win anything, he is trying to use biradri system to put together a coalition of lotas based on Jat and AraiN brotherhood and pre-election and post voting rigging to have enough Jats and AraiN winning in Punjab to claim his popularity and justifying staying in power.

SameerJB
Please lets not take the lind of rhetoric - lets deal with realities, we can all learn something, instead of our positions that are known to all. It is your particular take - please do not ascribe to the people of Pakistan, the ambitions of BB and NS. I mean it`s simply not justified. Mr. Musharraf`s acknowledgement that irregularities did take place in the referendum, is not sufficient grounds to suggests that the people of Pakistan do not support him or that the referendum was not legal.
Let`s keep the focus on what democracy has been/is in Pakistan and not on a referendum, that is already history as are BB and NS.

Perhaps you would like to comment on the ``democractic procedures`` of the institutions of state and those of politicians?

#24: It is not politicians. It is the right of the people/ tax payers to employ/ elect employees to run the affairs of their country. it is their money, their country. They gave right to BB and NS to be at the helm and not to Musharraf. They actually refused it to him when he asked for it - during referendum.

Since when are Pakistani politicians ``tax payers``?

15 by nasah;

Huzoor kya baat likhi hay, wallah [..the need of the hour - is the reform of the Pakistan Military by the civilian politicians - not the reform of the civilian politcians by the Army…] ...janab the civilian politicians that your are pining for are no good either…they have blackened their faces from the same pot…

anyone who thinks any good…however little...can come out of the futile exercise on Oct 10 is in denial or delusional…

Mark these words. Pakistan is an occupied land. The Occupation Army has to be removed from the equation. Unless that is forced, nothing will change.

Regards,

temporal

Re: Civilian and Military misunderstanding each other

The need for employees to understand employer is always more important than other way around. Military being paid to do the job of defending - the employees - must understand the employer, the tax-payer civilians. The employer only needs to understand employees in small horizontal businesses, not in large vertical businesses like governing a nation. An employees refusing to understand is often booted out by the employer representative and that is exactly what NS did to Musharraf.

Those who get paid for and accumulate plots should better understand Civilian employer and only request to be heard or understood by Civilians. No employer likes to be f&cked by the employees to the extent of robbing the employer business or running it dry. Some employees are provided arms out of necessity, not to be used against management.

If military is equal source of revenue, the civilian-miltary understanding should be at par and if they bring in more revenue than civilian, military should be traeted as employer. Plain and simple!

A drop of water on bucket fill of salt does not make water, a solvent. It becomes a solvent once it is more.

Romair, ferozk
Musharraf?s true democracy as I see it is : for the army, of the army, by the army paid for by the people of Pakistan. Could you explain how this is good for your country? Please be generous with your explanation.
If you ask me your country has not had democracy from April 17 1953. I assume you know the significance of that date.

Regards,

Faruk

Ferozek #17: ``Yes; the military is really misunderstood by the majority of Pakistan`s pseudo-intellectual classes and the blame for that is not the people`s but the military`s, which has always assumed that its actions were lauded by the people.``

I have met very few people who understand both the Pakistani military and the Pakistani civilian thought process. I will be the first to admit that I was baised and ill-informed about the civilian thought process, when I was in the military. As were nearly all my colleagues. And I have noticed that my civilian colleagues are equally biased and ill-informed about the military, as an institution.

The only people I have met who are informed about both are those who left the military at a young age, and then established civilian careers. I would count myself in this category, and others like Ayaz Amir, and some of my colleagues who left as Captains and Majors in their twenties and early thirties. People who retire after a full military career, and become civilian retirees, never really leave the military practically. And civilians cannot join the military, after having a civilian career.

What I have also noticed is that civlians, with no understanding of the military, are dead sure they understand it completely. And military men, with no civilian experience, are dead sure they have civilians figured out. This has lead to prejudices, misguided self-confidence and even hatred from both sides.

Since Chowk is completely visited by civilians, many of whom are self-proclaimed but very ill-informed critics of the military, I generally find myself trying to reduce their prejudices by pointing out the holes in their biased arguments, mostly unsuccessfully. However, whenever I am with my old military colleagues, specially those who have reached senior ranks, I always find myself trying to reduce their prejudices about civlians in a similar manner, mostly unsuccessfully.

It is really amazing to see how little individuals in both groups know about each other - even individuals who are blood relatives.

I don`t think the military is to be blamed for the pseudo-intellectual discussions of civilians, just like civilians are not to be blamed for similar discussions by the military. I think what needs to happen is for both groups to open up their minds, stop forming rock-solid opinions without adequate knowledge, and realize that it is very difficult to understand things one hasn`t experienced (experience does not mean having a father who was in the military or one who was a civilian - although that does provide some information). And, most of all, to listen to people who have experienced both sides.

On the whole I would say that the average junior military officer is one of the most respected persons amongst Pakistan`s common folk (shopkeepers, farmers, taxi-drivers). This is different from feared, which is what the common folk feel towards the police and civil services. I received a lot more respect from shopkeers etc when I told them I was in the military, than when I told them I was a software consultant. The upper-class and intellectuals (self-proclaimed or otherwise) are either indifferent to the junior officer or dislike him. The common folk are indifferent towards the General level soldiers and somewhat fears him. While the upper-class and intellectuals (self-proclaimed or otherwise) dislikes (and even hates, in many cases) the Generals and fears them as well.

India comes first in US-Pakistan ties
By Selig S. Harrison

http://www.csmonitor.com/2002/0909/p11s01-coop.html

sadna -- the urgency -- the need of the hour -- is the reform of the Pakistan Military by the civilian politicians -- not the reform of the civilian politcians by the Army.